Custom Search

Next (Commentary Part I)
Table of Contents
Henry Neufeld - Religion, Philosophy and Politics

Ezekiel 1

A Glimpse of the Glory of Yahweh

Copyright © 1979 Henry Neufeld.  All Rights Reserved

Basic Textual Assumptions

In suggesting that the book of Ezekiel is a unity, one must not insist that we now have the book in the exact form in which it was first set down by the prophet.  The text of the first chapter of Ezekiel prepared for this paper will assume the possibility of editorial work by a school of prophets centered around Ezekiel,¹⁹ while doubting the probability of the extensive editorial work and possible redactions of the above-mentioned authors.  However, the book does show signs of a turbulent textual history.  G.  A. Cooke states, "In the Hebrew Bible, perhaps no book, except 1 and 2 Samuel, has suffered more injury to its text than Ezekiel."²⁰ And one could note, probably no chapter in that book has suffered more than the first one.  Even so, most of these problems can be explained by two possibilities, and the remaining difficulties can be resolved by careful textual criticism.

Firstly, one has to consider the nature of the first vision and its probable effect on the prophet.  Perhaps Ezekiel wrote the material now contained in Chapter 1 shortly after the vision, and thus wrote in a state of excitement.  In any case, in reliving the experience sufficiently to write it, he would return to the intense nervous excitement of the situation.  The entire description shows a man writing various details as he sees or remembers them, thus providing a slightly disjointed description.  Those who correct out the unusual style in this type of writing by eliminating "errors of transmission" detract from the note of tension and excitement which is apparent in the original work.

Second, scribes employed in copying the type of manuscript which would be produced above, would find an unusually difficult piece of work on their hands.  The style would help to produce true errors of transmission, and the result of the process is the chapter as we have it today.

In weeding out these errors of transmission, close attention will be paid primarily to internal evidence.  The Septuagint will be compared, and where this external evidence agrees with the internal evidence one can consider oneself safe in accepting a different reading than that of the Masoretic Text.  Thirdly, suggest[ed] emendations will be considered.

Signs

Lower case letters following a word in the translation will indicate a textual note concerning that word.  If more than one word is involved a letter will be placed immediately before the group followed by the same letter at the end.  If the variation is large, the beginning letter will be followed by a hyphen (a-) and the final one preceded by the same sign (-a) to avoid confusion Abbreviations, where used, will be those of the Biblia Hebraica, except that Gothic symbols there will be replaced by the typewritten upper case letters corresponding.  Two commentaries are cited throughout: Walther Eichrodt's Ezekiel²¹  and G.  A.  Cooke, The Book of Ezekiel.²²  These were the only commentaries available which were sufficiently critical to warrant citation.  Of these two, Eichrodt is somewhat too critical to be of use in some cases, as he omits entire passages and so makes insufficient comment.

Translation

(1)And it happened," in the ^athirtieth year^a in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, while I was among the exiles at the River Kebar, the heavens were opened to me, and I saw ^bvisions of God.^b  (2) ^c-In the fifth of the month, that is the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin, (3) the word of Yahweh came certainly to^d Ezekiel (the son of Buzi) the priest in the land of the Chaldeans, at the River Kebar, and the hand of Yahweh was upon him^e there.^-c

(4) And I looked, and lo, a windstorm coming from the north, a great cloud bank, and fire flashing, ^fand it had a gleaming around (it)^f  and in the midst of it (something) like the gleam of brass ^gin the midst of the fire.^g (5) And in the midst of it (was) the form of four living creatures. And this (was) their appearance.  They had the form of a man.  (6) And they each had four faces, ^h  and each one of them had four wings.^h  (7) And their legs were straight; and the sole of their feet was as the sole of a calf's foot, and they were sparklingⁱ  as the gleam of polished bronze. (8) And the hands^j  of a man were under their wings at their four sides.  [ ]^k  (9) ^l-Their wings were each joined to one another.  They did not turn as they went, each one went straight forward.^-l  (10) ^m-And (this was) the form of their faces: The face of a man, and the face of a lion to the right for the four of them and the face of an ox to the left for the four of them, and the face of an eagle for the four of them.^-m  (11) And their wings wereⁿ  spread out above.  Each had two joined to one another^o  and two covering their bodies.  (12) And they each went straight forward; wherever the wind-(storm) was about to go, they went.  They did not turn as they went.  (13) ^p-And the form of the living creatures was like the appearance of the lightning which was flashing between the living creatures.^-p And the fire was gleaming.^q  And from the fire came forth lightning.  (14) ^r-And the living creatures went forth and returned as the appearance of lightning.^-r

(15) And I looked at the living creatures, and behold, one wheel was on the earth beside the living creatures ^sfor each of the four of them.^s  (16) The appearance of the wheels and their works was as the gleam of chrysolite, and the four had one^t  form.  And their appearance and their works were as it were a wheel within a wheel.  (17) They went at the four sides^u  as they went; they did not turn as they went. (18) And their rims^v  were high and fearful and their rim was full of eyes around for the four of them.  (19) And as the living creatures moved, the wheels moved beside them, and as the living creatures rose up from upon the earth the wheels rose up.  (20) Wherever^w  the wind(storm) was about to go, they went [ ]^x  and the wheels rose along with them, because a living spirit was in the wheels.  (21) ^y-As they (the living creatures) went, they (the wheels) went, and as they stood, they stood, and as they rose up from upon the earth, the wheels rose up, because a living spirit was in the wheels.^-y

(22) And the form of a vault was over the heads of the living creatures^z  like the appearance of crystal, awesome,^aa stretched out over their heads above.  (23) And under the vault their wings were straight, each one to the other [ ]^bb but they each had two covering their bodies.^cc  (24) And I heard the sound of their wings, as the sound of many waters, and the sound of the almighty as they went; a crowd, as the sound of an host.^dd  As they stood they let their wings drop, (25) and there was a voice from above the vault which was above their heads.  [ ]^ee  (26) And above the vault which was over their heads was a sapphire stone--the form of a throne--and upon the form of a throne, a form like the appearance of a man upon it above.  (27) And I saw (something) like the gleam of brass, like the appearance of fire between it around, from the appearance of his thighs and upwards.  And from the appearance of his thighs and downwards I saw (something) like the appearance of fire, and it was gleaming around.^ff  (28) As the appearance of the bow which is in the clouds on a rainy day, thus was the appearance of the gleaming around (it), It was the appearance of the form of the glory of Yahweh.  And I saw it, and I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice (of one) speaking.

Textual Comments

a-a "thirtieth year" - Due to the apparent conflict between this statement and the "fifth year of the exile of king Jehoiachin" in verse two this has been the subject of considerable discussion and emendation Kittel suggests sh^eloshim shanay or sh^eloshim shanah l^echayay to indicate the prophet's age, but it is a little difficult to picture the textual process which would have changed either of these readings to the one in the Masoretic Text.  Volkmar Herntrich suggested wayy^ehiy b^elishi shanah as did also C.  F.  Whitley, although they provided differing exegeses of the passage as a result of their emendation.²³  Paul Auvray, along with some others have suggested that is a correction for sh^elosh ;esreh.  Auvray states hopefully that "Entre sh^eloshim et sh^elosh ;esreh la difference n'est pas très grande."²⁴ Rothstein, making the same emendation noted that 593 BC was the 13th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign.²⁵  However, it is also difficult here to reconstruct the process of textual transmission which would have produced the reading.  Due to the availability of several alternative explanations, not requiring emendation of the text, and the unity of manuscript evidence, it has been determined to leave this as it is in the Masoretic Text.

b MT reads mar'oth but the New English Bible (NEB) reads mar'ath with the Peshitta and some Greek manuscripts.²⁶ The MT reading is here maintained for reasons that will be apparent in the commentary.

c Paul Auvray considers this to be the introduction to a separate vision, the call of chapters 2 and 3, thus leaving this section out of chapter 1 entirely.²⁷  Anthony D. York would agree, but would consider verse 1 to be the introduction to a vision which has now been lost, while verses 2 and 3 are the real introduction.²⁸  The switch in person here, from the first in verse 1 to the third in verses 2 and 3 indicate the possibility of a later hand, providing an explanation for verse l which was not needed earlier.  Eichrodt, in the Old Testament Library.²⁹  supports this, as does Cooke (International Critical Commentary)³⁰  who goes even further, stating that verses 2 and 3 show the work of two different editorial hands.

d Kittel suggests that 'el-y^echezq'el might have been 'elay, and then apparently would continue on with y^echezq'el.  With the variation found in G (Septuagint) and S (Peshitta) for the end of the verse, this would place the entire introduction in the first person.  The transmission process needed to produce this does not seem entirely probable. (See following note.)

e If we read "me" in place of "him", here (BH Apparatus), this continues the elimination of the third person references in the introduction.  However, it seems more likely that a scribe would wish to eliminate the change from first to third persons by changing the thirds to firsts than to remake two verses into the third person.  If we read "me", the process of transmission would be: Verse 1 originally, including the last phrase of the present verse three.  The explanatory verses 2 and 3 would be added, and ;alay changed to ;alayw to correspond to the other references.  If we read "him", verses 2 and 3 are simply editorial additions (probably contemporary with the prophet), with no secondary textual changes.

f Eichrodt states that this phrase is a gloss from v.  27b, Cooke concurs.  The reasons given are a bit vague, however, so it is retained.  It is possibly one of the results of the peculiar character of the vision.  g Eichrodt and Cooke both list this also as a gloss, necessitated by the previous gloss.  It is retained for the reasons above.  h Kittel (BH apparatus) suggests l'^echath rather than l'^echath lahem.  This appears to be a brazen conjecture.

i nots^etsim is the wrong gender to refer to anything close by, but it is apparently intended to modify the legs.  BH suggests nots^etsoth.

j Read wiydey rather than wiydew with some manuscripts and G.  G reads "hand" rather than "hands".

k This phrase is not translateable in context.  Eichrodt leaves them out as well as all of verse 9, Cooke reorganizes them into verse 9 as "And their wings belonging to the four of them were joined one to another and their faces turned not when they went." The majority of the mss evidence of G suggests "And the faces of them four turned not as they went." However, G(A) reads "And their faces and the wings of them four were joined one to another." Probably the copyists of G had the same problem reconciling this passage as did those of MT.  It has therefore been left out as a possible dittography, but certainly not translateable.

1 Eichrodt omits this verse entirely.

m Eichrodt states that the statement "in front", taken from context should be supplied here to indicate the position of the "face of a man." Cooke disagrees, suggesting that this was not the arrangement of the faces at all, rather, that the faces are apparently arranged two to the right and two to the left.  Eichrodt has the more probable view, but it is unnecessary to supply this detail in the translation.

n up^eneyhem is left out in G and L. It also makes no sense here.

o "to one another." BH suggests 'ishshah 'el '^achothah which apparently gives the sense, although it does not seem textually probable.

p-p This verse presents some difficult problems.  Cooke would modify the text following G, but it is stated there that "the glosses, if they be such, were already in the text used by G." BH suggests umitok but this seems unlikely except by deliberate change, and reasons for this are absent. Kenneth Freedy³¹  suggests this as a "cue gloss", which was placed in the margin to connect a section of writing to a previous section, and later incorporated into the text.  The position taken here is that it is a gloss, but was added by a scribe, (originally probably in the margin), as an improvement over d^emuth which emphasizes the form, which the coals would not have too specifically, and later this was incorporated into the text.  (See Appendix.) The remainder of the verse translates adequately except for a problem of number with mithhaleketh which, whatever the case, obviously must refer to halapiydiym.

q Lit.  "and gleaming to the fire."

r-r This verse is omitted by NEB³²  Eichroclt, and Cooke, following the majority of the G mss, except for G(A), which (at least in this chapter) tends to agree with MT, and may have been corrected to it.  The verse is also difficult to translate. It has been included here, substitution yatso' for the unknown ratso' and translating bazaq as lightning as in Holladay.³³

s-s Kittel suggests with G, L, S, and A l^e;arba;tan which makes more sense than the MT.

t Lit.  "One form for the four of them.  'echad is the wrong gender, but we should be used to that by now in this chapter.

u Kittel suggests ;evreyhen, but Holladay³⁴ allows the same translation for riv;eyhen.

v Incorrect gender.

w ;al '^asher should read 'el with BH.

x shamah haruach laleketh is a dittography.  It is absent in G and S, as well as from some Hebrew manuscripts. Both Eichrodt and Cooke concur.

y-y Cooke views both verses 20 and 21 as a later gloss on 19, Eichrodt leaves out the entire section concerning the wheels. It appears however, that the repeated expressions here simply indicate the strong impression made on the prophet by the unified movement of the various components of the scene.  They have therefore been retained.

z Read chayoth with some Hebrew mss and the versional evidence.

aa Eichrodt suggests the omission of this word with G, stating that it does not fit our context.  However, it seems to fit in quite well.  It appears as an exclamation of the prophet in awe at the appearance of the vault.

bb l^e'iysh sh^etayim m^ekasoth lahenah appears to be a meaningless dittography.  The living creatures would have two wings covering themselves and two covering their bodies.  What would they then have stretched straight out? Eichrodt considers this entire section (25b-25) a gloss for various reasons.  See commentary at the verses.

cc Lit.  "covering themselves, that is, their bodies."

dd The reading here rearranges the punctuation in the MT. See commentary for explanation.

ee This is possibly a dittography, repeated from 25b as it is not found in G.

ff Lit.  "and gleaming to it around."

Next (Commentary Part I)